Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy.

NUR 550 Translational Research Graphic Organizer Assignment

NUR 550 Translational Research Graphic Organizer Assignment

 

T1 research
T2 research
T3 research
Quantitative) Research
Observations (Similarities/Differences)
Methodology
Translates new disease mechanisms knowledge into clinically relevant treatment regimes, diagnostics, and understandings that can be applied to humans (George et al., 2019).

Ensures that results from clinical studies are translated into everyday health decision making and clinical practice (Czajkowski et al., 2016).

It looks at how populations’ research informs hypotheses testable in basic science laboratories as well as how animal models biomarkers can be used as population-based screening tools (Surkis et al., 2016).
Uses numerical data to predict the future of a service or a product and helps in making changes. The data is analyzed through mathematical and statistical methods (McCusker & Gunaydin, 2015).
Translational research helps in linking laboratory science, patients and community needs by acting as a

NUR 550 Translational Research Graphic Organizer Assignment

NUR 550 Translational Research Graphic Organizer Assignment

bridge between science and practice. Quantitative research, on the other hand, is used to test new ways of diagnosing, preventing and treating illnesses and thus applicable to human subjects and clinical studies (Gaitonde, Miller, Trame & Schmidt, 2015). NUR 550 Translational Research Graphic Organizer Assignment
Goals
To come up with treatments and interventions (Czajkowski et al., 2016).

To test how the interventions and treatments are efficient and effective (George et al., 2019).

.
To disseminate and implement research for system-wide change Surkis et al., 2016).
To quantify a problem through numerical data as well as uncovering patterns and formulating facts in research (McCusker & Gunaydin, 2015).

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:NUR 550 Translational Research Graphic Organizer Assignment

Quantitative research forms the basis of translational research since it can explore a phenomenon and make discoveries (McCusker & Gunaydin, 2015).  On the other hand, translational research methods ensure that clinical and scientific findings are applied to humans and they become strategies that enhance community health, patient outcomes, and healthcare delivery.
Data Collection
Data is obtained through observational studies, phase 1 clinical trials and case studies (Surkis et al., 2016).

Data is obtained through phase 2 and 3 clinical trials, controlled studies and observational studies (Czajkowski et al., 2016).
Data is obtained using phase 4 clinical trials, comparative effectiveness research, dissemination and implementation research, clinical outcomes research and post-marketing studies (Czajkowski et al., 2016).

Data is obtained using longitudinal studies, surveys, online polls, systematic observation and interviews (McCusker & Gunaydin, 2015).
A common objective for the data collection methods is obtaining quantifiable data that produces substantial results. A comparison of the clinical trials used in translational research with surveys and interviews in quantitative research reveals that they both offer testable real data (Gaitonde, Miller, Trame & Schmidt, 2015).
References

George, S., Vassar, S. D., Norris, K., Coleman, B., Gonzalez, C., Ishimori, M., & Brown, A. F. (2019). Researcher perspectives on embedding community stakeholders in T1–T2 research: A potential new model for full-spectrum translational research. Journal of Clinical and Translational Science, 3(2-3), 120-124. https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2019.384

Czajkowski, S. M., Lynch, M. R., Hall, K. L., Stipelman, B. A., Haverkos, L., Perl, H., & Shirley, M. C. (2016). Transdisciplinary translational behavioral (TDTB) research: opportunities, barriers, and innovations. Translational behavioral medicine, 6(1), 32-43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13142-015-0367-3

Surkis, A., Hogle, J. A., DiazGranados, D., Hunt, J. D., Mazmanian, P. E., Connors, E., & Aphinyanaphongs, Y. (2016). Classifying publications from the clinical and translational science award program along the translational research spectrum: a machine learning approach. Journal of translational medicine, 14(1), 235. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12967-016-0992-8

McCusker, K., & Gunaydin, S. (2015). Research using qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods and choice based on the research. Perfusion, 30(7), 537-542. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267659114559116

Gaitonde, P., Miller, S. A., Trame, M. N., & Schmidt, S. (2015). Quantitative Approaches in Translational Research: An Overview. In Translational Research Methods for Diabetes, Obesity and Cardiometabolic Drug Development (pp. 243-264). Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4920-0_10

The purpose of this assignment is to conduct a comparison on different research designs to better understand their designs and application. Understanding the different types of research design is important so that nurses can effectively apply evidence-based research into practice to address issues and offer better patient care.

You will utilize your approved nursing practice problem to complete the evidence-based practice project proposal assignments for this course and NUR-590, during which you will synthesize all of the sections into a final written paper detailing your evidence-based practice project proposal.

Review feedback from your instructor on your “Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal: Identification of Nursing Practice Problem,” submitted in Topic 1. If your original proposed nursing problem was outside the scope of nursing practice or not conducive to an evidence-based practice project proposal, work with your instructor to identify a new topic prior to beginning this assignment. If your proposed topic requires revision, complete this prior to beginning this assignment.

Conduct a literature search on your approved nursing practice problem. Find two translational research articles, one quantitative article, and one qualitative article. Using the “Translational Research Graphic Organizer,” present your proposed topic and, in the tables provided, compare one translational study to the quantitative study, and one translational study to the qualitative study.

Refer to the “Evidence-Based Practice Project Proposal – Assignment Overview” document for an overview of the evidence-based practice project proposal assignments.

You are required to cite four peer-reviewed sources to complete this assignment. Sources must be published within the last 5 years and appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.

While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are not required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite.

Attachments

NUR-550-RS2-TranslationalResearchGraphicOrganizer.docx

In this class we will be exploring translational research and Evidence Based Practice as well as forming a PICOT question. This will be a very busy week as translational research may be a new topic for you and you will need to decide on a population and intervention to begin your PICOT question. Our goals for this week are:

Identify the different levels of translational research.
Differentiate translational research from evidence-based practice.
Discuss the application of translational research to population health management.
Evaluate sources of translational research.
Select a valid nursing practice problem for an evidence-based practice project proposal.

Please proceed to the Class Wall and tell us a little about yourself. When you complete your introduction be sure to read the policies, syllabus and weekly expectations.

You will be expected to submit answers to two DQs and to respond to at least three peers. Two posts will be your DQs and you need a minimum of 3 responses in addition to your 2 DQs. Each DQ must be at least 150 words or 12 sentences and must have two references and citations. Quotes are not allowed. Responses must be at least 75 words or 5 sentences and have one reference and a citation.

Be sure to review all the Study Materials as well as find the website for your state or county health department as your PICOT question must be based on a mortality/morbidity indicator related to a clinical problem pertaining to a population. When forming your question DO NOT use any content related to nurse staffing, staffing ratios, staffing levels (shortages) or any major system-level changes.  A template is provided in your materials for the beginning of your PICOT question.  You must use this template.

Please be sure to use the link to the GCU library provided and then click on Translational Research on the left as you will need this site to search for the literature you will need and to answer your DQs.

Refer to the calendar for the due date of the assignments. Be sure to submit your papers to LopesWrite to evaluate for plagiarism. However, please note that your first paper due this week does not need to be submitted to LopesWrite.

Please use the Questions to Instructor forum for your questions or your Private Forum for private communication. You may also reach me at between the hours of 8AM-8PM EST. All questions are welcome.

Course Code Class Code Assignment Title Total Points
NUR-550 NUR-550-O500 Translational Research Graphic Organizer 100.0

Criteria Percentage Unsatisfactory (0.00%) Less than Satisfactory (80.00%) Satisfactory (88.00%) Good (92.00%) Excellent (100.00%)
Translational Research Graphic Organizer 100.0%
Comparison of Research in Relation to Methodology 25.0% A comparison of research in relation to methodology is not included. A comparison of research in relation to methodology is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete. A comparison of research in relation to methodology is present. A comparison of research in relation to methodology is clearly provided and well developed. A comprehensive comparison of research in relation to methodology is thoroughly developed with supporting details.

Comparison of Research in Relation to Goals 25.0% A comparison of research in relation to goals is not included. A comparison of research in relation to goals is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete. A comparison of research in relation to goals is present. A comparison of research in relation to goals is clearly provided and well developed. A comprehensive comparison of research in relation to goals is thoroughly developed with supporting details.

Comparison of Research in Relation to Data Collection 25.0% A comparison of research in relation to data collection is not included. A comparison of research in relation to data collection is present, but it lacks detail or is incomplete. A comparison of research in relation to data collection is present. A comparison of research in relation to data collection is clearly provided and well developed. A comprehensive comparison research in relation to data collection is thoroughly developed with supporting details.

Required Sources 5.0% Sources are not included. Number of required sources is only partially met. Number of required sources is met, but sources are outdated or inappropriate. Number of required sources is met. Sources are current, but not all sources are appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content. Number of required resources is met. Sources are current, and appropriate for the assignment criteria and nursing content.

Presentation 10.0% The piece is not neat or organized, and it does not include all required elements. The work is not neat and includes minor flaws or omissions of required elements. The overall appearance is general, and major elements are missing. The overall appearance is generally neat, with a few minor flaws or missing elements. The work is well presented and includes all required elements. The overall appearance is neat and professional.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use) 5.0% Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is employed. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. The writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) 5.0% Sources are not documented. Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

Name:  Discussion Rubric

  Excellent

90–100

Good

80–89

Fair

70–79

Poor

0–69

Main Posting:

Response to the Discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

40 (40%) – 44 (44%)

Thoroughly responds to the Discussion question(s).

Is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least three current credible sources.

35 (35%) – 39 (39%)

Responds to most of the Discussion question(s).

Is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

50% of the post has exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least three credible references.

31 (31%) – 34 (34%)

Responds to some of the Discussion question(s).

One to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.

Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

Cited with fewer than two credible references.

0 (0%) – 30 (30%)

Does not respond to the Discussion question(s).

Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.

Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

Contains only one or no credible references.

Main Posting:

Writing

6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Written clearly and concisely.

Contains no grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Written concisely.

May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Written somewhat concisely.

May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Contains some APA formatting errors.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Not written clearly or concisely.

Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Main Posting:

Timely and full participation

9 (9%) – 10 (10%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts main Discussion by due date.

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts main Discussion by due date.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Posts main Discussion by due date.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post main Discussion by due date.

First Response:

Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.

9 (9%) – 9 (9%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Responds to questions posed by faculty.

The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

First Response:

Writing

6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.

Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources.

Response is written in standard, edited English.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication.

Response to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.

First Response:

Timely and full participation

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date.

3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Posts by due date.

0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post by due date.

Second Response:
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.
9 (9%) – 9 (9%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Responds to questions posed by faculty.

The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

Second Response:
Writing
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.

Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources.

Response is written in standard, edited English.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication.

Response to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.

Second Response:
Timely and full participation
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date.

3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Posts by due date.

0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post by due date.

Total Points: 100

Name:  Discussion Rubric

 

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.